linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/11] Security: Add hook to get full maclabel xattr name

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 28 Feb 2008 17:26:13 -0800 (PST)
From:	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To:	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:	Dave Quigley <dpquigl@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>, casey@...aufler-ca.com,
	viro@....linux.org.uk, bfields@...ldses.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] Security: Add hook to get full maclabel xattr name


--- Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no> wrote:

> 
> On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 19:39 -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 07:04:57PM -0500, Dave Quigley wrote:
> > > There are several things here. I've spoken to several people about this
> > > and the belief I've gotten from most of them is that a recommended
> > > attribute is how this is to be transported. The NFSv4 spec people will
> > > probably say that if you want xattr like functionality for NFSv4 use
> > > named attributes. For us this is not an option since we require
> > > semantics to label on create/open and the only way we can do this is by
> > > adding a recommended attribute. The create/open calls in NFSv4 takes a
> > > list of attributes to use on create as part of the request. I really
> > > don't see a difference between the security blob and the
> > > username/groupname that NFSv4 currently uses. Also there is a good
> > > chance that we will need to translate labels at some point (read future
> > > work).
> > 
> > Then use the existing side-band protocol and ignore the NFSv4 spec
> > group.  They're <skip colourful language here> anyway.
> 
> As I've told you several times before: we're _NOT_ putting private
> ioctl^Hxattrs onto the wire. If the protocol can't be described in an
> RFC, then it isn't going in no matter what expletive you choose to
> use...

With the SGI supplied reference implementation it ought to be a
small matter of work to write an RFC. If the information weren't
SGI proprietary I could even tell you how long it ought to take
a junior engineer in Melbourne to write. The fact that there is
currently no RFC does not mean that there cannot be a RFC, only
that no one has written (or published) one yet.


Casey Schaufler
casey@...aufler-ca.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/